Ideal PLAN DDG

crobato

crobato

Colonel
VIP Professional
Yes, if we can confirm the theory that the HQ-9 is active guided, then the idea is moot.

Two lines of thought is running here.

The first is that the HQ-9 is derived/copied/inspired from the S-300. This can open up the possibilty that both systems may be compatible with each other. There are certain tactical advantages to this.

The second is that HQ-9 is active guided. Which is a serious possibility because the FT-2000 export is passive, and it does not take long to see that the guidance system has no connection to the S-300 at all. A passive system is just a short step away from an active one. Its not hard to imagine using the SD-10/PL-12 seeker into a missile like this. SM-3 uses the seeker from the AIM-120.
 
planeman

planeman

Senior Member
VIP Professional
I think all the designs and considerations that we have discussed have overlooked the potential for a land-attack destroyer. Following on from the USN arming its boats with Tomahawks, the French and German navies are taking this concept further. The future german F-125 frigates will have large MLRS' and 155mm howitzer (PH-2000 based) as primary weapons.

In PLAN use a land-attack destroyer would primarily be employed as a cruise missile platform and for fire support for amphibious landings, as well as air-defence saturation and general bombardment.


In the design below I've borrowed the look of the old Luda class DDGs but used stealthy angles and radically updated the weaponary:
superludanr9.jpg


The most potent weapons would be YJ-62s mounted in forward firing positions below/beside the bridge. These could be a mix of anti-ship and land attack versions.

Behind that is a turntable mounted MLRS, either WS-2 or A-100. These rockets have ranges of 70~200km and the can employ various warheads, payloads and seekers. Behind that is an automated reload magazine.

The illustration also shows a Type-730 with 6 TY-90 IR-SAMs bolted on the side. Just a thought.

The helipad would primarily be used by UAVs and as a spare pad during amphibious operations. The hanger below the pad can also be kitted out as a hospital or as an auxillary magazine for the artillery rockets.

What think you?
 
swimmerXC

swimmerXC

Unregistered
VIP Professional
Registered Member
planeman said:
I think all the designs and considerations that we have discussed have overlooked the potential for a land-attack destroyer. Following on from the USN arming its boats with Tomahawks, the French and German navies are taking this concept further. The future german F-125 frigates will have large MLRS' and 155mm howitzer (PH-2000 based) as primary weapons.

In PLAN use a land-attack destroyer would primarily be employed as a cruise missile platform and for fire support for amphibious landings, as well as air-defence saturation and general bombardment.


In the design below I've borrowed the look of the old Luda class DDGs but used stealthy angles and radically updated the weaponary:
[qimg]http://img118.imageshack.us/img118/6840/superludanr9.jpg[/qimg]

The most potent weapons would be YJ-62s mounted in forward firing positions below/beside the bridge. These could be a mix of anti-ship and land attack versions.

Behind that is a turntable mounted MLRS, either WS-2 or A-100. These rockets have ranges of 70~200km and the can employ various warheads, payloads and seekers. Behind that is an automated reload magazine.

The illustration also shows a Type-730 with 6 TY-90 IR-SAMs bolted on the side. Just a thought.

The helipad would primarily be used by UAVs and as a spare pad during amphibious operations. The hanger below the pad can also be kitted out as a hospital or as an auxillary magazine for the artillery rockets.

What think you?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't the LUDA hull be too small to fit all that stuff in there.... it thing might tilt to one side since it look's like the center of gravity doesn't look right. :eek:

Nice job on the CGI! :D
 
planeman

planeman

Senior Member
VIP Professional
Here's a more modern DDG with a similar land-attack orientated weapons fit. I've traded a proper helicopter hanger for the second 100mm gun.
aadladdgsh5.jpg


SSM: 16 x JY-62 (in sloping launchers between the bridge and the hanger, hidden from view by the stealthy hull sides)

MRLS: 10 x 400mm launcher on stealthy turntable at rear of ship. Navalised WS-2 system with 40 reloads in magazine under helideck (semi-auto reload)

Area Air-defence: 32 x S-400 "small" missiles in VLS forward of bridge

CIWS: 2 x Type-730 mounts enhanced with 6 x TY-90 IR-SAMs on each launcher.

Main gun: 1 x 100mm automatic gun in stealthy turret (retracting barrel)

ASW: 2 x 4 SS-N-29 rocket-torpedo missiles (on eadge of helipad)

Helicopter: 1 x light/medium ASW/GP helicopter such as Z-9 or Z-15

Decoys/chaff/flares etc: 4 x 40mm MRLS in front of bridge (hidden from view by stealthy ship sides)

7000t
180 crew
 
A

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
BTW, I'd like to note that many modern SSM's can be configured for LACM role. So if your ship is equipped with 16 x SSM's, you can fire them all at land targets. The only drawback is that SSM's don't have the range of true cruise missiles.

p.s. Great job on the CG drawings!


swimmerXC said:
Wouldn't the LUDA hull be too small to fit all that stuff in there.... it thing might tilt to one side since it look's like the center of gravity doesn't look right. :eek:
Click to expand...

I read on CDF's that, at one time there were plans to install the Sea Dart SAM on Luda's, but the plan was abandoned due to high cost (~$100 million) and the weight issue. Those SAMS were about as heavy as C-801's!
 
Last edited:
bd popeye

bd popeye

The Last Jedi
VIP Professional
Great thread. Great drawings.

However..That DDG in planemans post would not be seaworthy. The super structure is to far foward and would make the ship not very stable at higher speeds or in a heavy sea state. In heavy seas waves would be crashing up on the bridge. The ship would be more prone to pitch fore and aft as well as port to starboard. ..Hope they have a lot of "puke powder"..Just my opinion.

Puke powder= is this green flaky chemical used to clean up vomit. It dries it up so it can be swept up..... Dunno if the USN still uses it.....
 
A

adeptitus

Captain
VIP Professional
I've always thought that the USN CGN-9 Long Beach had a huge forward superstructure. But it's near the center, so I guess it works.

Going back to the ideal DDG concept, I think the ship should have a mix of "hard-kill" and "soft-kill" capability vs. missiles, guided bombs, and torpedos.

If the enemy aircraft has deployed anti-ship missile or guided bombs, the defending ship should have the capability to intercept with medium-range SAM, then short-range SAM, and then CIWS guns. The ship would also deploy decoy/chaff/flare/smoke/etc. rockets for soft-kill defense.

Against torpedos/torpedo-mines, the ship should have anti-torpedo rockets like the Paket-E/NK system that could engage at distance, then torpedo-barrage rockets for close-range hard-kill, plus towed or launched acoustic decoy rockets for soft-kill defense.

IMO the primary threat against surface warships today are enemy aricraft and submarines. Surface ship to surface ship engagements are very rare due to effectiveness of SSM's -- it tends to give the other guy an incentive to keep distance and send their strike aircraft instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top